Let’s discuss something that has been receiving a lot of attention in the media and in the Second Amendment rights community – the lawful carrying of guns in restaurants.

I suspect many of you will agree with the first part of what I have to say and will be offended by the second part.

But I hope you’ll read it all and then share your thoughts with me atRob@SelfRely.com

Let’s get started.

In recent months, a small number of individuals have taken it upon themselves to test how various restaurant chains would react to a group of “patrons” openly carrying guns – in most cases, long guns – as they attempt to enter those restaurants and be served.

These incidents have caused confusion on the part of everyone involved, especially the press.

“Sonic-Drive-In and Chili’s Bar & Grill both issued statements asking diners to refrain from bringing concealed weapons into their restaurants, even if they have a permit, NBC News reported Friday.

“Sonic Vice President of Public Relations Patrick Lenow told the news agency in an email that while the drive-in chain respected current gun laws, certain actions led to new consideration for their restaurants’ policies.

“’While we historically have relied upon local laws to guide how we address the display of guns at drive-ins, recent actions required we carefully reconsider this approach. We’ve considered the views and desires of our customers and employees that staff the drive-ins across the country. Accordingly, we’re asking that customers refrain from bringing guns onto our patios or into our indoor dining areas. With respect to the storage of guns in vehicles, we ask that our customers continue to honor local laws,’ he said.

“Chili’s parent owner Brinker International issued a statement asking customers to keep their handguns out of plain sight following recent incidents at some of its restaurants.

“’We recognize that the open carry of firearms in restaurants creates an uncomfortable atmosphere and is not permitted under many local liquor laws. So, we kindly ask that guests refrain from openly carrying firearms into our restaurants and we will continue to follow state and local laws on this issue,’ Brinker public relations manager Ashley Johnson said in an email to CNBC.”

There is so much wrong in this news report – based on an NBC News report, “Chili’s, Sonic Toughen Stance on Guns,” that it’s beyond frustrating. And it follows faulty reporting when earlier incidents involving Chipolte Mexican Grill and Starbucks took place.

Most important, contrary to the first paragraph in the Washington Times piece quoted above, neither Sonic nor Chili’s specifically referenced “concealed weapons.” In fact, if you look at the email from Sonic Vice President of Public Relations Patrick Lenow, he specifically references the “display of guns.” That certainly leads to the logical conclusion that he was discussing individuals openly carrying a firearm as compared to concealed carry.

So it seems clear both restaurants are referencing open carry laws and the open carry of firearms, not concealed carry. This also makes sense as the incidents that sparked the statements from the restaurants involved open carry, not concealed carry.

Now for my thoughts that you might find both agreeable and disagreeable.

For clarity, let’s ignore the confusion on the part of the media when it comes to the difference between open carry laws, concealed carry laws, and our inalienable rights under the Second Amendment. Most reporters, even at the conservative Washington Times, don’t have a clue when it comes to the Second Amendment and the current state of gun laws.

Instead, let’s focus on open carry vs. concealed carry when it comes to restaurants. And, in so doing, let’s differentiate between what we can lawfully do and what we should do once we apply common sense.

So here’s the part you’ll probably find agreeable.

In many states it is lawful to openly carry firearms, including long guns. As a Second Amendment purist – in fact, as a Bill of Rights purist – I support the right of any individual to openly carry a firearm. I will support the right of that individual to openly carry a firearm in almost every circumstance and every location that I can imagine.

Having stated that – here comes the part you might not agree with – I think anyone who openly carries a firearm (hand gun or long gun) into a restaurant (or most any other public establishment) is a fool.

Let me explain.

If you are openly carrying a firearm in a public establishment that might be a target for robbery – in other words, almost any business in America – you might as well paint a sign on your forehead that says, “SHOOT ME FIRST.”

Even without the possibility of a robbery, you are openly (pun intended) inviting trouble with some idiot who decides he’s going to challenge your right to openly carry. And if that challenge becomes a physical confrontation, well, that’s not a good situation for anyone.

So let’s apply a bit of common sense.

When it comes to your personal safety and your ability to tactically defend yourself against an assailant who places you in imminent fear of death or serious bodily harm – the legal reason to employ deadly force – you are far better off carrying a concealed handgun than openly carrying a firearm.

Why? Because you have the element of surprise and that is always to your advantage. Further, if you are properly concealing your handgun, you’ll never have to worry about what an establishment’s policy is – they’ll never know you are armed.

In short, while you may have the legal right to open carry, concealed carry is the right thing to do.

Do you agree? Do you disagree? Let me know by emailing me atRob@SelfRely.com and I’ll use your thoughts (I won’t identify you personally) for further discussion on the best way to use our Second Amendment rights in a future advisory.

Be safe and secure,

Rob Douglas

You are receiving this as part of your subscription to the Self-Reliance Institute (formerly called the Patriot Privacy & Security Society). Be sure to tell your friends about us so they can get their free gifts and complete access to the Self Reliance Institute Library right here.

You touch on an often overlooked but critical topic. We spend considerable time and money acquiring the gear and skills we might need to be prepared for a variety of potential disasters/disruptions either natural or man-made, but often overlook preparation for sudden/unexpected debilitating medical problems, or worse unexpected death from any number of possible causes.

This strikes a nerve with me because my dad died suddenly and quite unexpectedly at the age of 43 from a massive heart attack. I was 17 years old at the time. If anyone thinks this does not turn your world upside down, I would beg to differ. Now, I am a CPA/MBA, and have some knowledge about what people go through when they find themselves in this kind of situation, and some experience in what can be done to minimize the chaos and confusion. These are always very stressful, emotional situations, and it can be VERY difficult to keep things held together and keep everything from going to hell in a handbasket. Trust me. I know.

The best way I know to prepare for this type of event:

1. Collect ALL important documents into one place. Birth Certificates, Marriage License, Titles and/or deeds to Vehicles/Home/Properties/Boats, etc. ALL Insurance policies…life, health, disability, homeowners, auto, boat, medevac, umbrella liability,long-term care etc., wills, living wills, military service records, professional licenses, and any other documents you consider important or critical. Include copies of your most recent 2 years of tax returns. Also include the articles of incorporation and bylaws/operating agreement for any closely held businesses you own or in which you have ownership interest as a partner, member, director (Sole propietorship, partnership, LLC, Sub S corporation, etc),

2. Make copies of all above documents. Place originals in lockbox and keep copies at home for reference…or vice versa, depending on your opinion on this matter. Some people prefer to have the original copies in their personal possession. Some documents may warrant having certified copies made or requesting certified copies from the issuers.. Again, this is a personal decision. This collection would be one of the critical items you would grab in a bug-out situation anyway, so having it all together is a good idea for lots of reasons. Obviously you would want to store these in-home in some kind of secure, fireproof portable box that would be hard for a burglar/looter to find, but easy for you to grab and go at a moment’s notice. Fireproof file boxes are available that suit this purpose well. And obviously, since these things lock, be sure somebody besides just you knows the combination or how to locate the combination or key.

3. Make a list of every debt you owe, the balance as of some specific date in time, the minimum payment, payment due date, account number, and website/username/password to the account if applicable. Likewise with all checking/savings/investment/brokerage./401k/IRA/HSA accounts.

This enables your appointed administrator/trustee to see at a glance the location of all your financial assets and liabilities, and the mechanism by which to access them should the need arise. Original debt instruments would not be a bad idea to add to the list of important documents, especially real estate mortgages, auto loans, and other collateralized debt instruments that create liens against any of your properties or assets.

4. Make a list of all the vendors you deal with, and again, any relevant account information and internet access information if applicable. This would include utilities, security system,pest control, newspapers, insurance premiums,and any other ongoing/regular vendors you deal with or are contracted with for ongoing services that result in monthly or quarterly bills to be paid.

Be sure to note any accounts (vendor or creditor accounts) that you have set up to automatically debit your checking account or charge to a credit card account each billing cycle. This will alert your administrator to keep adequate funds in place to cover these automatic transactions. Also note any accounts that are set up for electronic statement delivery. It seems that every company is pushing us to “go paperless” and stop receiving paper statements. This will alert your administrator to keep an eye on your email for statement notifications.

5. Keep the document inventory updated…adding information for new accounts as they are created and removing documents for accounts that are closed and for which you will have no further potential use.

With the above items located and placed in an organized manner, it should be possible for your designated trustee or administrator (whether your spouse, family member, attorney, or bank trustee) to pick up and administer your affairs in a thorough and reasonable manner should you be incapable of doing so for yourself for any reason.

I hope you an others find this helpful.I’ve tried to hit the most important issues in a short amount of space, so I’m sure there are some details I’ve overlooked.

A few weeks ago we asked our readers to send us tales of scams that they had experienced or heard about. We were pretty amazed at the response. Thanks for sending all these in.

If you would, please send this along to your friends so that they can be warned too.

The Jewelry Scam From Shirley:

“I have one for you. I received a postcard telling me I would be given Necklace worth $50 for FREE and all I would have to do is pay the $8.95 shipping cost. I was to call a phone number to get the information. When I called I was told it was from a jeweler who considered me a good customer and described the necklace as Pearl with real red gems on it. I as to give them a credit card # to pay the shipping. This raised a red flag in me. They would accept a check if I gave my check bank number to them, I asked to give the money direct to the jeweler and they wouldn’t name the jeweler. So I told them I wasn’t interested under those conditions. Then I emailed two jewelers I had purchased some jewelry from: Stauer, and Natures Jewelry and asked if they were the ones who made the offer. Both emailed right back and said they never do business that way. Here is the front and back of the postcard. I don’t know who sent it, but it must be those at the phone number I was to call. You might want to look into it as I’m certain many more people got that postcard and taken in by it.”

The IRS Scam from Dan:

“Yes, Chris, I have been scammed somehow. I received a notice from the IRS that my refund could not be direct deposited so my refund would be mailed within the next 4-6 weeks. One problem, though; I have not yet filed my 2013 returns! All the IRS will tell me is that a return has been filed utilizing my name and SSN so I now have to jump through all sorts of hoops and will have to file a paper return, waiting up to 6 months for any refund that might be due me. According to them, this could also affect my future filings.”

The Paypal Scam from Margaret:

“A couple of years ago I was hacked and called the Yahoo number I found on line. I do not know who answered but I paid $300 dollars for 5 years of security. The payment went through Pay Pal. I later found out that the payment did not go to Yahoo but to an unknown party and needless to say my e-mail was not protected. I changed carriers but lost out on the money.”

The Bank of America Scam from Rich:

“Received email from Bank of America a few days ago requesting information because my Bank of America Visa Card may have been compromised by someone . It stated, If I don’t fill out the information my charge card would be be cancelled as of a date. The information they wanted was my; name. dob and password. No mistakes on the email, it was very professional, looked official, the logo was 100 % and no missed spelled words.

I called bank of America and they told me they never send for information, as they have it all and they never threaten to cancel someone’s account. I sent a copy to Bank of America fraud office.

I’m in my seventies which I know they go for. I have received a few of these over the years. I went from four charge cards to one and always check my account on the computer. Only got hit once and this is when the wife was on a cruise ship. It had to have been done from the ship. I found the fraud on my home computer and notified Bank of America. They wanted to cancel the card right then, but I talked to the person in charge and they allowed to keep the card active until the wife hit the states in three days. The wife called me when she arrived and I immediately cancelled the card. Maybe it is a good idea to have two cards in case you have to cancel one of them.”

Another IRS Scam from Steve:

“Steve Bryant here. I enjoy your newsletter! I think I may have come across a new scam or something of a twist on old theme. On March 24, 2014, I received a CP53 Notice from the IRS concerning my 2013 1040. The notice indicates that my refund check will be mailed to me since my financial institution rejected the direct deposit request. The notice was post datedApril 7, 2014. The interesting issue here is that I HAVE NOT FILEd MY TAXES for 2013 at this point. I am in the process of researching the problem but I figured I would pass it by you in hopes you may be able to shed more light and post it in your newsletter.”

Do you have one? Leave it in the comments below. Thanks for stopping by….

As members of the Patriot Privacy and Security Society know,
our goal is to provide you with valuable and timely information that you can use to enhance your privacy and security. That process begins from the moment you receive the Patriot Privacy Kit eBook. But, as you might expect, the privacy and security knowledge base is always changing. Therefore, we want to do everything we can to keep you informed of those changes.

Recently, several members of the society have asked me if
Tor is still a safe way to surf the web anonymously. First, the question makes me smile because it means you’ve read the Patriot Privacy Kit eBook closely and are using the information and techniques contained in the materials. Second, the answer is yes – with a few caveats.

Let’s review.

On page 22 of your Patriot Privacy Kit eBook, Tor is discussed under the heading “Use a Secure Internet Browser” that begins on page
20. After discussing a number of ways to browse the Internet, the book discusses Tor, stating:

“A more anonymous choice is Tor Browser: https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser.html.en
This browser allows you to be anonymous by bouncing queries and identities off a series of relays run by volunteers so that spies would not be able to track your movements. This process slows down browsing but is effective.”

That statement remains accurate.

But, because of documents revealed by National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, we now know more about the level of security Tor provides.

Bottom line: In the opinion of the NSA, Tor is the most secure of the anonymous browsers available.

Does that mean Tor can’t be defeated by the NSA? No.

Under certain circumstances, the NSA can penetrate Tor. However,
the NSA documents – and analysis of those documents by a number of differentcryptanalysts – provide information on how the NSA is able to sometimespenetrate Tor. With that knowledge, steps can be taken to decrease the likelihood that Tor can be penetrated.

More important, it’s unlikely that almost anyone would need a NSA level of protection. What we do know is that Tor will protect you from hackers, stalkers, private and corporate spies and most every other type of threat to your privacy and security when viewing web sites.

With that understanding, I want to provide you with a number of recent articles about Tor that you can review and evaluate. I suggest you print them or bookmark them and keep them with your Patriot Privacy Kit eBook as a supplement to the section on secure browsing.

Tor: ‘The king of high-secure, low-latency anonymity’ – Extracts from top-secret NSA document acknowledge the fundamental security of the Tor protection tool and say ‘there are no contenders to the throne in waiting.’

Everything you need to know about the NSA and Tor in one FAQ– This article by the Washington Post is a good primer on Tor and the NSA.

Secret NSA documents show campaign against Tor encrypted network – This article, also by the Washington Post, examines the methods the NSA used to attempt to penetrate Tor. Importantly, it also reports that the people who operate Tor are responding to the weaknesses that have been exposed.

How the NSA attacks Tor/Firefox users with QUANTUM and FOXACID
– A very technical look at the NSA’s methods.

A review of these articles teaches us that the NSA has and, presumably, still can defeat Tor.

But, for the privacy and security purposes of almost any user of the Internet, Tor is still the king.

Here is the second edition of the Patriot Privacy and Security Society Newsletter.

Just click here to access it.

You can save it by clicking on the link and then right click on the page and clicking save.

This edition contains all of the advisories we published in September after you received your first newsletter in mid-September. For that reason, there is one less article than there normally will be in a regular month.

Starting with next month’s newsletter, the newsletter will contain all the material we published in that particular month.

Please feel free to share the newsletter and, as always, you can write me atRob@PatriotPrivacy.com

In last week’s advisory, I responded to a number of emails from members of the Patriot Privacy and Security Society who had written to comment on my “Carrying a Concealed Handgun” advisory.

This week, I received many more emails about guns and the Second Amendment. All the emails raised important issues we will discuss over time, but I planned on waiting at least a few weeks before digging into the Second Amendment again.

But I can’t wait.

There is one email that I feel I must share and discuss separately from all the rest and I didn’t want to wait until a later date.

The reason I want to address this one email right away is because it expresses much of what we often read and hear from individuals who believe the Second Amendment is being misinterpreted by many defenders of the Second Amendment.

So I am going to reprint the email in its entirety (without identifying the author other than by initials), exactly as I received it so the author’s original emphasis is included. Following the email, I will respond in a way that I suggest all folks who believe the Second Amendment grants a modern right to keep and bear arms should respond when confronted with similar arguments.

Here’s the email I received:

—

Rob,

I read with interest the comments about guns you emailed. I do not own a gun, but I respect the 2nd amendment as it is written in just ONE complete sentence of only 27 words. I am not a lawyer, but as one who understands English, and possesses common sense, I would insist that the first 13 of those wordson such a basic subject must be included. I continue to marvel at the interpretation of thislittle Amendment by the NRA, whose only interest in guns, let’s face it, is in selling as many as possible.

We always hear only HALF of the second Amendment quoted “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Written English requires it rational to consider the context in which the “right to bear arms” has life. How can we ignore the first part of the Amendment, when it actually creates the conditions in which the “right to bear Arms” is allowed to exist?

A STRICT reading of the Amendment would certainly require some connection with “A well regulated Militia” as it relates to the “security of a free State” and an understanding of the word “arms” to the people to whom the Amendment related. Do you detect anything about personal use, or self-protection as some sort of Constitutional Right? As a matter of historical fact, “arms” (basically muskets) were a necessary part of society for food and as a “Militia” which the government could not afford. There was a time when adult males were required to be ready with their “arms” to fulfill the duties of a non-existent army against the countries foes. Get it?

The bottom line for anyone who really wants to interpret the 2nd Amendment, is that any conditions other than some connection to “a well regulated Militia, beingnecessary to a free State” (Italics mine) would seem to restrict, if not to eliminate, the “right to bear arms.”

Fortunately for those “law-abiding” citizens who enjoy using guns recreationally, the USA has allowed them exemption from any well-regulated Militia or security of a free State requirements clearly quoted in the 2nd Amendment.

I hear the screams of all those who think they should augment law-enforcement or think they are really important in “protecting” themselves and the rest of us from the crazies or criminals amongst us. Some even think they are some force (against?) the Government or the Army in protecting our civil liberties or someone they decide is a dictator or sufficiently a threat to our Democracy; even the obvious silliness of protection against foreign powers. How naive can that be?

One of the comments you published mentioned the “replete” situations in which a presence of a private “lawful gun” prevented further harm. I’d like to hear of a few of them in my lifetime (86 yrs). And measure them against the MANY DAILY gun deaths in the USA, compared to the RARITY in all other (not third world) countries which either prohibit or at least control private ownership of guns.

The only way we are to be eternally vigilant against an instant, unexpected event, like the darkened theatre shooting recently, or the sudden appearance in your bedroom of an armed criminal, is to allow EVERYONE to almost literally have his finger on the trigger of a gun at all times. Precisely what the NRA would like. And not any restriction on what type of gun – a 22 or an AK 47, or how about a bazooka or propelled grenade.

Aren’t they “arms”? The writers of the 2nd Amendment were talking about muskets! Are they equal? I believe that an overwhelming majority of gun owners in our country would draw the line before we got into heavy-duty military weaponry. I invite you to picture the horror of each “law-abiding” citizen carrying his AK 47 or maybe only a little .22 into that darkened theatre when the insane shooting began. The dead would have been in the hundreds with everyone blazing away at what they “thought” was the original shooter. Is that the ideal way for society to protect itself?

So what’s the rational compromise? Let “law-abiding citizens” have recreational guns, after adequate checks to also look into their “legal” past or any medical or mental histories suspect of any predilections toward violence. While it is only realistic to know that there will be law-breakers who enable other law-breakers to get guns, IT SHOULD BE MADE AS HARD AS POSSIBLE, to do so. And the background checks more strict, punishing the dealers and gun shows which ignore them. Many of the recent shootings could have been prevented by these restrictions. The guns for private use (still useful for “self protection”) must be limited as to magazine size and caliber, lest we become victims of the circumstances of mass hysteria or macho personalities deciding whom they can shoot. These decisions should be left to law enforcement bodies. If you think that’s too weak a response to lawlessness, you must again look to the countries that follow it to compare the incredible difference in gun-caused deaths.

Why cannot we exercise good common sense and stop screaming about our “2nd Amendment rights”. Be careful, or the true meaning of the 2nd Amendment may be actually put into effect. Those “absolutists” of it MUST abide by the ABSOLUTE, and complete sentence.

By the way, as an example of the meanings or present use of Constitutional Amendments– has anyone discussed the quartering of Army personnel in your home lately? Check the 3rd Amendment — that’s about the same length as the 2nd and bears no relation to our times, but meant something to the writers of it.

Signed,

LS

—

Ok, that’s the letter in its entirety. We’ve all read and heard similar arguments. In fact, there are probably other members of the society who agree with the author – at least part of what he/she wrote.

Now, I promised a response.

My response is the same response I use with friends and associates who express the same beliefs that LS wrote in his email: Read District of Columbia v. Heller.

Yes, it really is that simple.

Read District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision that addresses most of what LS and others raise as arguments against Americans’ right to bear arms in a modern society.

Read it and read it with an open mind. Because if you do, you’ll find that the Court (with some additional explanation, these points are taken directly from the opinion’s syllabus) ruled:

*The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense.

*The Amendment’s prefatory clause (A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,) announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part (the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.), the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms.

*The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The antifederalists feared that the federal government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved.

*The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment.

*The Second Amendment does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.

Now, it should be noted that the Heller decision did not specifically grant the right to concealed carry as that specific issue was not before the Court and has not yet come before the Court. Heller was limited to the right to keep weapons in the home.

However, Heller does address most of the common arguments made by those, like LS, who believe the Second Amendment only applied to military uses and only applied to weapons used in the 1700s.

Both of those arguments are wrong.

But the main point I want to make today is that if we are going to discuss what the Second Amendment “means,” we all have to start at the same point. And that point is the Supreme Court’s decision in Heller.

So, arm yourself for future discussions with friends about the Second Amendment by reading what Justice Scalia had to say in District of Columbia v. Heller and, in the weeks to come, let’s discuss other aspects of this most fundamental right.

As always, let me know what you think. Write me at Rob@PatriotPrivacy.com

Here is the second edition of the Patriot Privacy and Security Society Newsletter.

Just click here to access it.

You can save it by clicking on the link and then right click on the page and clicking save.

This edition contains all of the advisories we published in September after you received your first newsletter in mid-September. For that reason, there is one less article than there normally will be in a regular month.

Starting with next month’s newsletter, the newsletter will contain all the material we published in that particular month.

Please feel free to share the newsletter and, as always, you can write me at Rob@PatriotPrivacy.com

Data breaches, government spying, identity theft. Everything we hear is another reason to be fearful.

Luckily I have some good news for you. There is one place the Feds, by their own recently leaked admission, cannot crack. That is the TOR internet browser.

Read the story here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/04/nsa-gchq-attack-tor-network-encryption

Internal documents show the NSA has had no luck cracking TOR on its own. Only when its paired with Firefox have they had success.

If you’ve heard of it before, you probably read my Patriot Privacy Kit, in which I recommend TOR as the best way to ensure your online communications are absolutely safe from prying eyes. In light of the recent NSA news, we couldn’t be sure this was still true until now.

If you’re a little foggy on the details of TOR, here’s a brief reminder:

TOR was a project originally funded by the feds and then abandoned

Is it now privately funded and developed by volunteer coders

It works by bouncing your commincations around the world, so as to make the source untraceable

Daily use is not recommended, as it can be fairly slow. But for secure communications it can’t be beat

You can download it for yourself here: https://www.torproject.org/projects/torbrowser.html.en
Its free and will remain so. As with most free things there is not much support but you wont need support for occasional use.Keeping you on the cutting edge,Chris Peterson, Privacy Advocate

I received a tremendous amount of email in response to the last Patriot Privacy and Security Society advisory, “Carrying a Concealed Handgun.”

So, since this advisory is following quickly on the heels of that advisory, I thought this would be a good opportunity to address a handful of the questions and comments that I received. Also, Chris and I are talking about the possibility of putting a together a concealed weapons guide for members of the Patriot Privacy and Security Society. So, stay tuned for more information about that possibility and keep your questions and comments coming!

So, let’s get to the mail. To protect the privacy of those who wrote me, I’m just using their initials.

—

AB wrote to ask:

I would like to know if you use dry fire techniques and what your take on dry fire is. I have the dry fire bullets, but have not yet had the opportunity to use them. I do not have a license to carry at this time. And I really don’t have access to a shooting range or facility. I am very grateful for all the knowledge I have gained with your site, tools and reports. Thank you.

Dear AB:

Thank you for your email!

In a future advisory, I will address the issue of dry firing. But, since you asked, let me share a few thoughts with you right away.

I have and do use dry fire practice from time to time. Just like you, I can’t always get to a gun range when I have time in my schedule to practice. So, I will use dry fire techniques to practice.

While many guns can be dry fired without damaging the firing pin, others will be damaged by repeated dry firing. So, it is always best to practice with dry fire bullets/snap caps/laser inserts.

As always, you must use good safety and gun handling techniques to be certain that the weapon does not contain ammunition and that the weapon is never aimed in a direction where an accidental discharge could cause harm. I can’t emphasize this enough because the majority of accidents happen during practice or cleaning of the weapon. So, always assume the weapon is loaded and handle it as if it is – even when dry firing.

So, bottom line: Dry firing for practice is perfectly fine as long as you take appropriate safety steps and also take steps to be sure you don’t damage the firing pin.

I hope that helps and please feel free to write me again with any questions.

Rob

—

RG wrote to comment:

Good letter Rob. I dislike letting the government know that I have a gun.

Dear RG:

Many thanks! And, I agree. I do not believe the government has the right to know what guns Americans own. I am an absolutist when it comes to the Second Amendment.

Rob

—

SY from Oklahoma wrote to say:

Hi Rob,

I found your post-Aurora shooting article a well thought-out piece and appreciated your points. Well done!

I’ve noticed when folks who don’t like guns talk about those of us who do, they call us “goons” or “freaks” (or worse). It’s important for them to realize law abiding citizens exercising our 2nd Amendment right are their first line of defense against a real “goon”!

Like you, no one knows I’m carrying or that I even like guns. My students know I’ll defend them from anyone wanting to do them harm and know I’d have to do so with my bare hands while at school or on a school trip. However, they don’t know that once away from work, I’m also armed with a firearm and will defend and protect them with extreme prejudice.

Count on me to help in any way I can!

SY, Oklahoma

Here’s what I shared with SY:

Hi SY,

Thank you so much for your email. You made my day!

You are absolutely correct. Properly trained, law abiding citizens exercising their Second Amendment rights are society’s best line of defense against criminals who don’t hesitate to do harm. Many of my friends are police officers and every one of them will tell you that the police are rarely able to stop a crime – especially a shooting – in progress before the damage is done.

Recent history is replete with examples of properly armed citizens stopping shootings before more damage is done or, more importantly, preventing a criminal from using a weapon in the first place.

I applaud your commitment to being sure that no one knows when you are or aren’t armed. This is very, very important and I will discuss this aspect in detail in the near future.

Please stay in touch with me and let me know in what ways I can be of assistance.

Rob

—

KM wrote to say:

Just read your article about carrying concealed handgun. I agree completely. My father-in-law is a gunsmith. He fixes guns, rebuilds them, does his own bluing, etc. We all agree that all these gun laws really don’t do a thing except prevent law abiding citizens from getting guns, and all the bad guys will get them by other means anyway. They’re not going to go through legal channels in the first place. Commonsense tells you that. I do support the 2nd amendment, but have always wondered about all the high powered machine gun stuff. I mean, WHY would an average citizen need such a thing?

Just a thought.

Here’s what I shared with KM:

Dear KM,

I should get to know your father-in-law. It’s always important to know a good gunsmith! And, you’re correct. The overwhelming majority of gun control laws are meaningless. An individual hell bent on murder or other serious crimes is not going to be thwarted by gun control laws.

As for higher power weapons or true automatic weapons, I have known quite a few folks over the years that are collectors and/or enjoy the recreational and competitive use of a wide-range of firearms. Personally, I have no problem with it and, as a Second Amendment absolutist, I don’t believe the government has the right to restrict access to those types of weapons.

Thanks for your input. I appreciate it very much!

—

As I mentioned at the outset, I received a lot of email on handguns and concealed carry this week. So, I’ll definitely be discussing this issue extensively in the coming weeks and months. Please share with me your thoughts. I love to learn from the experiences of others – so share!! How would you have answered any of the letters I shared above? Do you have a different point of view? Write me: Rob@PatriotPrivacy.com